ftp_list

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic listing action, without mentioning whether it is read-only, whether it follows symbolic links, whether it includes hidden files, or what the output format looks like. This is insufficient for an agent to anticipate side effects or return data.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the purpose, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return values and any side effects. It simply says 'list', but does not specify whether the output is a simple list of names, detailed directory listings, or whether it is recursive. For a tool with minimal schema and no output schema, this is incomplete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema fully describes the parameter 'path' with a description and default value, so schema coverage is 100%. The description's phrase 'in a path' adds no meaningful detail beyond the schema, so it is at the baseline of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'List files and directories in a path on FTP server'. The verb 'list' and resource 'files and directories' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like ftp_download/upload/read/write which involve file content operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage by stating its core function, but it does not explicitly provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ftp_pwd or ftp_cd. There are no exclusions or alternative suggestions, so it only meets the 'implied usage' level.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.